Skip to main content
4:00 pm
will to the depths of glenn beck, they were predicting not just victory, but a glorious one in this election. what made them think so? the polls were tight but favoring president obama. what north star was guiding the gop convincing them that the white house would be back in their hands in january? back where their hankerings were convinced it belonged? there was a darker side to this deep sense of executive entitlement, the sense they had the same assumed access to the white house as they did in the corporate dining room. it's more than a bit frighting. i have heard at least one person of the right state their pained belief or relief that at least the election didn't end up in a situation where obama won the electoral vote but romney got the popular vote. i agree that would have been bad. it would have denied the democrat the clear mandate. the implication from the right wing seemed to have been had the republican candidate won the
4:01 pm
popular vote, there would be trouble of some undefined type. what the heck did that mean? yes, we've had to put up with this ridiculous secession petitions out there, the texas version having been signed by over 100,000 people since election day, but could the right have gone further had it been armed with a popular vote victory? there does seem to be a difference in the two parties. when al gore lost 12 years ago, he ignored his 600,000 vote victory in the popular vote. he just learned to live with the irony. republicans have carefully forgotten this bit of history, but i have real doubts those on the angry, demanding right would have been so quietly obedient to constitutional law. there's something out there on the right right now that is still uneasy with this defeat. searching desperately for an explanation of how the conservative caterpillar they had right there in their hands became the liberal butterfly now happily fluttering and, yes, defiantly free of them, and they don't like it one bit. i'm joined by rick hertzberg and
4:02 pm
"the huffington post's" howard fineman. rick, i wonder about this. this sense they have of almost royal ruling class identity with the white house. what do you make of it and their attitude before and after the election? they really weren't going to lose, and they haven't really in some strange way because they got the house. >> yeah. well, this attitude has built up over time over the years. they didn't really think bill clinton was legitimate because ross perot they thought cost him the election. they thought that obama's original election was a freak on account of bush being such a terrible president, and they were not equipped to deal with this defeat, and this was a real defeat because it was a defeat across the board for the republican party. yes, they kept the house, but guess who got more votes? democratic candidates of the house got more votes than republican candidates of the house, and these -- it may not make any difference constitutionally, but it makes a
4:03 pm
moral difference. >> and they like to hang on it. i think there's more to their sense of entitlement. shortly after the romney/ryan ticket lost, 26 states won just over 47% of the vote. in other words, did worse than john kerry in 2004. paul ryan denies that the president earned a mandate. let's listen. >> the president wins 330-some electoral votes, every battleground state with the exception of north carolina. does barack obama now have a mandate? >> i don't think so because they also re-elected the house republicans. so whether people intend it or not, we have divided government. >> so you don't think there's a mandate here? >> i don't because then they would have put nancy pelosi in charge of the house of representatives. see, i think the ideas we talked about, i think they're popular ideas. >> anyway, it turns out paul ryan is wrong. when you look at the raw vote, voters cast about 400,000 votes more for house democrats than for republicans, and with votes still being counted, as rick said, that's expected to go to a million vote majority. my question is why are they getting into this whole thing? when we have elections, i worked for tip o'neill, tip never came out and said but we have a 40-seat majority in the house and we'll have a bigger one after reagan gets re-elected. the presidential election is where the mandate goes. >> first, i agree with rick that this began with bill clinton, the sense of no legitimacy to a democratic president.
4:04 pm
that's where it started. that's where it's continuing. i think also that the way politics is divided today makes it almost required that people deny the legitimacy of the other side. and beyond that i think the republicans kind of view themselves as a kind of ruling class that are entitled by virtue of their success, by the virtue of money, by the power of money to buy anything, that they should be able to continue to buy these elections. >> i think -- rick, what do you make of this sort of north star they go by that they believe this is a center right country? i don't know whether the house believes the old founding father's notion that somehow white men of property rule the country and that's their notion of equality because somehow in their minds they think, oh, it must be a republican, all my friends are, the guys i work with, the women i know, they're all republicans. this country must be republican. i can't believe these results. >> well, there may be something to it in the sense that depending on how you ask polling questions, you can get the answer you want. you can get an answer that tells you it's a center right country, you can get an answer that tells you it's a center left country. but in this business of what would have happened if obama had lost the popular vote and still won the white house, i think you would have had a very different reaction from obama, and i think that in the year 2000 if al gore had been able -- if the shoe had been on the other foot and gore had become president while bush got the popular vote, he would have responded differently, he
4:05 pm
would have acknowledged that, and he would have wanted to do something about it. that has to change at some point, and it's going to have to change after -- probably after both sides' oxen are gored. >> you think we're going to get a change in our constitution to make it a popular vote? >> you don't need it to be the constitution. but on this business of what would have happened if obama had lost the popular vote and still won the white house, i think you would have had a very different reaction from obama and i think in the year 2000 if al gore had been able -- if the shoe had been on the other foot and al gore became president while bush got the popular vote, he would have responded differently. he would have acknowledged that and he would have wanted to do something about it. that has to change at some point and it's going to have to change after probably both sides oxes are gored. >> so you think we need to have a change in our constitution to make it the popular vote? >> there is the national popular
4:06 pm
vote through the states. you can do it without changing the constitution and see how you like it. >> interesting. the states can simply decide to go by the popular vote of the country. the course of republicans predicting a romney win was loud. michael barone predicted romney would win. peggy noonan said all signs pointed to a romney win. dick morris. listen to this. >> in florida "the times" says obama will win by one, but their sample has seven points more democrats than republicans, so that poll is off by a factor of eight. so instead of obama winning by one, romney would win florida by seven. in virginia they have obama winning by two. but they have eight points more democrats than republicans, and historically there's one point more republican than democrat.
4:07 pm
that's off by a factor of nine. romney wins ohio -- wins virginia by seven. >> so you are standing by your prediction of a romney landslide? >> absolutely. romney will win this election by five to ten points in the popular vote and will carry more than 300 electoral votes. >> we're talking about a real phenomenon here. you have people like neil newhouse, not just right wing crazy people, who were saying this election was in the bag. it was going to be a glorious victory, overwhelming victory. smart people all saying overwhelming. what was their world view that convinced them of that? i think a lot of that leads to this defiance. we still have the house, that's a counter mandate. there's something strange going on here, and it's going to matter as we get into these cliff talks. >> well, it's because i don't think the republicans want to admit to themselves what the real problems are. there are two, as i see it. one is the cultural side. the country keeps changing on issues such as abortion and other things. >> we're going to get to that today.
4:08 pm
>> we're becoming more liberal on those matters. >> same-sex. >> they're stuck with those traditional issues. they don't know how to get away from it. the other thing is money. the other thing is that people like chris ruddy, who i think is a responsible, interesting conservative, runs newsmax, says that the reason why mitt romney lost is because people didn't like him. but what chris doesn't understand is that the reason they didn't like mitt romney is that he seemed only to care about money. he seemed only to care about profit. and that he didn't have any communal since to him that could be applied to government. the republicans don't see that a pure obsession with free market economics comes across to everybody else in the country who isn't them as too cold-blooded, as too cold-hearted. and the fact that with almost 8% unemployment, with the people
4:09 pm
thinking that the country is going in the wrong direction, that they still voted for barack obama makes it an even bigger rejection of the republicans and conservatives than they are willing to admit to themselves. >> just going back, this love the founding fathers has gotten to a point of not reference for their courage and standing up to the british empire and putting their lives on the line and being enlightened given who they were. but the notion that the men are white men of property and that's really what romney ran on, white men of property. he didn't say it. i don't think he put it in any words. but look who he was rallying to as, you know, as howie just pointed out, that seemed to be the rallying cry, men of property, join together, defend the wagon train against the onslaught of the others. it seemed to be what they were doing in this campaign. >> well, let's be fair to the founding fathers. for their time they were pretty darn progressive, and the idea that, for example, that they drew up the constitution as a mandate for small government, just the exact reverse of the truth. we had small government under the articles of confederation.
4:10 pm
the framers went for big government and, yeah, they gave small government arguments when they wrote the federalist papers like you always try to appeal to the arguments of the other side, but they just don't understand what the framers were up to and they worshipped them rather than trying to imitate them. >> they weren't thinking of sally hemings' vote, i'm sure of that. >> the other thing is when you listen to the explanations that the republicans and conservatives give for why they lost, they always say, well, the black community and the hispanic community voted overwhelmingly for the president. >> urban vote. >> as if those votes don't count as much as everybody else's vote and if that's some kind of explanation, some kind of explanation for the weird phenomenon of the fact that the republicans didn't win. there was this extraterrestrial force out there of african-americans and hispanics. well, duh, that's the country.
4:11 pm
>> this has no bearing on the republican party. the last reference to the black auxiliary is hitler. during the '36 olympics we had jesse owens and a couple other guys, and they said they had their auxiliary out there. coming up, could we see the first signs of the gop splitting apart on abortion? this is big stuff. john mccain said the issues hurting republicans, it's time for them to drop the issue and leave it alone. does it mean stop talking about it, stop making a litmus test of the presidential candidate? this is big stuff. plus, dumping grover. that's a nice thought. a number of republicans are finally putting limits on their no tax pledge and telling grover norquist to get lost. but remember, there's only one of those people in the house of representatives. keeping hope and change alive. president obama's aides are hoping to keep the campaign going and use their new leverage at the polls to win the fight for higher taxes against the
4:12 pm
wealthy. this is "hardball," the place for politics. [ male announcer ] this december, remember -- what starts with adding a friend... ♪ ♪ ...could end with adding a close friend. ♪ the lexus december to remember sales event is on, offering some of our best values of the year. this is the pursuit of perfection.
4:13 pm
get ready for some more partisan agendas in the state governments across the country. that's because come january at least 37 states will be under single party control. 37 of them. with one party holding both houses of state legislatures and the governorship. and that's the largest number of states under single party control in 60 years. 24 of those 37 states will be controlled by republicans and 13 under democratic control. we'll be right back. for his sm! pizza! [ garth ] olaf's small business earns 2% cash back on every purchase, every day! helium delivery. put it on my spark card! [ pop! ] [ garth ] why settle for less? great businesses deserve great rewards! awesome!!! [ male announcer ] the spark business card from capital one.
4:14 pm
choose unlimited rewards with 2% cash back or double miles on every purchase, every day! what's in your wallet?
4:15 pm
welcome back to politics and "hardball." abortion politics, particularly anti-abortion politics, has been a guiding principle of republican politics for decades. yesterday senator john mccain stepped back from the edge and seemed to say it was time for the republicans to rethink their
4:16 pm
position. here is mccain on fox. let's listen. >> i think we have to have a bigger tent. there's no doubt about it. we've got to give them something to be for, and as far as young women are concerned, absolutely i don't think anybody like me -- i can state my position on abortion, but to -- other than that, leave the issue alone. >> when you say leave the issue alone, you would allow -- you would say freedom of choice? >> i would allow people to have those opinions and respect those opinions. i'm proud of my pro-life position and record, but if someone disagrees with me, i respect your views. >> how do you move away from a pro-life stance that threatened to pull apart a pro-life coalition? republican congressman james langford of oklahoma is opposed to abortion rights. joan walsh is from salon. do you think it's essential for the republicans to keep a strong pro-life plank in your party platform and may keep it as a litmus test for any presidential or vice presidential candidate? >> half of americans are very pro-life. to say to half of your americans your opinions don't count
4:17 pm
wouldn't equate to representation of them. this is a very, very important issue. yes, i do think you keep it in. i think you continue the conversation, but you do it in a way that's appropriate. chris, if you look at last year or the last two years voting in the 112th congress, there have been 11 votes on abortion in the house of representatives. 1,557 total votes, 11 of those dealt with abortion. this is not even 1% of our votes that have been taken in this session of congress. to say this has been a big issue, i think it's been pretty fair, actually. >> let's take a look at your platform. i will get to joan in a minute.
4:18 pm
let's look at the platform language. this is in the platform you agreed to as a party this year. it takes a pretty tough view. it reads, quote, we support a human life amendment to the constitution and endorse legislation to make clear that the 14th amendment's protections apply to unborn children. you're basically saying from the moment of conception that the fetus or unborn child has the rights of life, liberty, and property under the 14th amendment which cannot be denied except through due process of law. you're basically establishing personhood in your party platform. do you believe that is something that pro-choice people could rally behind? could you ever have a republican who was the candidate for president who was pro-choice? what are you really saying? john mccain said clearly no longer make it a partisan issue. drop it from the public debate. are you saying keep it as a debate between republicans and democrats? >> i doubt that republicans would put someone into the white house that is pro-choice on that because there's such a strong family value among republicans. we look into the womb and we see two legs, two arms, two eyes, a nose, and a beating heart, unique dna, and we say that's a
4:19 pm
person. so this is not anti-choice. this is pro-life. this is we see that as a child, and we see every single child of inherent value and should have the opportunity to be able to live. >> what are the rights of a pregnant woman? >> what are the rights of a pregnant woman? the pregnant woman has the same rights everybody else does but so does the child. this is splitting up americans and saying an american that is very small doesn't have the same rights as americans that are taller. no matter what your height or weight, as an american you have unique rights and responsibilities under our constitution, and we want to honor life and honor people. we don't think that's irrational. >> i follow you very rational. don't question me. i follow your reasoning precisely.
4:20 pm
joan, following his reasoning that you're a person the moment after conception, if you use an iud you're a murderer. >> right. >> this is the language they choose, and they choose it. >> it's not just abortion. it's certain forms of birth control would be murder and it would be criminalized. you know, i'm pro-choice, i'm very much pro-family and pro-life and americans are divided on this issue, although there is a majority of people who think abortion should be legal, at least in some circumstances. >> what about john mccain's statement yesterday? weren't you amazed for him to just drop that from the airplane to lighten the load basically? >> they are on a course to demographic extinction. they're losing women. they're losing latinos and asians and african-americans. they're losing young people. other than that, they're doing great. you know, so there have been a lot of proposals for what they have to do to get some of those groups back, and i think choice is one issue. i would say though with senator mccain, he talks about being open to other views. it's not necessarily that we won't continue to fight to make abortion -- >> he didn't sound like he would make it a partisan issue. >> he sounded like it, but he left himself wiggle room. >> let's talk about this, congressman, because you're the
4:21 pm
republican. we're talking about your platform. if somebody is of similar mind to joan walsh who agrees with your party on fiscal issues but disagrees on social issues, should they vote for a president who has promised to get rid of roe v. wade? and how can you make that case? >> it's the same thing a lot of americans have different issues that they vote on. a lot of people vote on fiscal issues, on jobs issues, on economic issues. the basics of it. the kitchen table things. that's pretty common. some people have their first priority is a life issue. they say doesn't matter the economy if you don't ever have life -- >> why should a choice person vote for the continuation of this republican platform which says from the moment of conception that unborn child or fetus is a citizen with rights of property, life, and liberty? >> there are plenty of people that are pro-choice republicans that are out there just like there are plenty of pro-life democrats out there because they're going to pick their own preferences. i would disagree this party is demographically falling apart
4:22 pm
when a 49%/51% election just occurred. you look at the house of representatives and you have this large percentage of republicans there. we still are a very divided nation. >> it's going to be about 47%, and most americans voted in the house races, most americans did vote for democrats. because of gerrymandering your party got a big majority, but that's because of gerrymandering. >> it's because the democrats waste a lot of votes in big city democratic districts. 99% of the vote. >> i want to say something very important about abortion. most women who have abortions are mothers. it's sadly a kitchen table issue. a lot of women are making the choice because they can't afford to bring another child into the world. it's a tough choice, but there's nobody better able to make that decision. our public policy has to be pro-choice because there's nobody else that can make that decision besides the woman and the people she trusts. otherwise, you are making her a criminal, the doctors criminals.
4:23 pm
it's just untenable. we're not going back to the world where we used to live where -- >> i think, joan, here is something you would agree with, and i think the congressman won't agree with. this is the exact words john mccain used yesterday. i don't think anybody like me, meaning a male of a certain age, i can state my position on abortion, but to -- other than that, leave the issue alone. in other words, he doesn't want to be heard on the issue really in terms of any debate over the platform. he basically thinks the party ought to stop fighting over it as a party, but you, sir, don't agree with him. >> i would say there are 750,271 people in the fifth congressional district of oklahoma, male and female. and to say because i'm a male that i can't represent the female opinion in my district is incorrect. there are hundreds of thousands of females in my district that are very pro-life and very passionate about this issue, and they deserve a voice in congress as well. so does that child. i understand the plight of the woman that's pregnant, but i
4:24 pm
also understand the plight of the child. >> well-said for your point of view. last word, joan? >> i think this is going to be an issue that splits the party. the republicans have pandered to people who are very extreme. we have that language in the platform that most people didn't know about until todd akin made his ridiculous remarks about legitimate rape. this is not going to be an easy one to finesse. >> i think the seams in the republican party are starting to show. i'm not saying that -- the seams are showing. congressman, it's great having you on. >> i would definitely disagree, but thank you. >> joan, you always are an articulate spokesman for a point of view i often share. up next, why is vice president biden in a bathing suit in nantucket? you know you like it to be 70 when you go in the ocean. this is about half that. this is "hardball," the place for politics. if you are one of the millions of men
4:25 pm
who have used androgel 1%, there's big news. presenting androgel 1.62%. both are used to treat men with low testosterone. androgel 1.62% is from the makers of the number one prescribed testosterone replacement therapy. it raises your testosterone levels, and... is concentrated, so you could use less gel. and with androgel 1.62%, you can save on your monthly prescription. [ male announcer ] dosing and application sites between these products differ. women and children should avoid contact with application sites. discontinue androgel and call your doctor if you see unexpected signs of early puberty in a child, or, signs in a woman which may include changes in body hair or a large increase in acne, possibly due to accidental exposure. men with breast cancer or who have or might have prostate cancer,
4:26 pm
and women who are, or may become pregnant or are breast feeding should not use androgel. serious side effects include worsening of an enlarged prostate, possible increased risk of prostate cancer, lower sperm count, swelling of ankles, feet, or body, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing during sleep, and blood clots in the legs. tell your doctor about your medical conditions and medications, especially insulin, corticosteroids, or medicines to decrease blood clotting. talk to your doctor today about androgel 1.62% so you can use less gel. log on now to and you could pay as little as ten dollars a month for androgel 1.62%. what are you waiting for? this is big news. we believe the more you know, the better you trade. so we have ongoing webinars and interactive learning, plus, in-branch seminars at over 500 locations, where our dedicated support teams help you know more so your money can do more. [ rodger ] at scottrade,
4:27 pm
seven dollar trades are just the start. our teams have the information you want when you need it. it's another reason more investors are saying... [ all ] i'm with scottrade.
4:28 pm
back to "hardball." now to the "sideshow." first bring on thanksgiving on nantucket. how about a cold dive in the ocean? that's how vice president joe biden spent his thanksgiving a.m. they took part in the annual cold turkey plunge, the fund-raiser for the local library. cold might be an understatement for the water temperature in nantucket this time of year is about 40-something. for a less festive side of the holidays, the american family association, which i think is on the right, has released its annual naughty/nice list of companies that celebrate christmas only at the cash register. as a rule of thumb, if a company winds up on the naughty list, it's because it doesn't use the word christmas in its christmas sales pitches. the against christmas list includes barnes & noble, i actually love that company, office depot, and banana republic. the rankings doesn't reflect the companies' charitable giving during the holidays. barnes & noble, for example, runs a holiday book drive. next, what's wrong with this family picture? how about everyone holding a gun?
4:29 pm
that's right. arizona's scottsdale gun club is offering the opportunity to have photos taken with guns in hand. >> what we're trying to do is add a little bit of holiday spirit into people's second amendment rights to be able to carry and purchase firearms. it's something that basically we just provide as a service to our customers and members. we do go all through the safety precautions, remove the firing pins, no fingers on the triggers. we do a completely free firearms safety class for families. >> this may have been one time you have to go to a safety training camp to get a family photo taken. finally, this is amazing stuff. finally, is president obama secretly plotting to run for a third term? investment adviser porter stansberry thinks so. >> if you look at people who ran for president for three terms, it's teddy roosevelt, franklin
4:30 pm
roosevelt, and obama. and they all have certain things in common. they're all populist, spent a lot of money on people. the other thing they had in common was in 1901 there was an oil boom. in 1930 there was an oil boom from east texas, and right now going on in america is the biggest renaissance in oil since 1930. it's the shale boom. and all this oil is producing huge new revenues for the feds and also enormous power for obama. of course, he's going to use that power and all that leverage to propel himself into a third term. >> of course, stansberry's prediction has one gaping hole, the 22nd amendment. quote, no person shall be elected to the office of the president more than twice. we heard a lot of anti-obama conspiracies. this could be the tipping point. up next, a growing number of republicans say they're willing to end their no tax pledge to grover norquist. the trouble is, only one is in the house of representatives where the deal with the white house will be made. that's ahead. this is "hardball," the place for politics.
4:31 pm
4:32 pm
4:33 pm
4:34 pm
here's what's happening. republican new jersey governor chris christie plans to seek a second term. he filed papers with election officials earlier. a formal announcement is expected in january. in egypt, another protest is planned for tomorrow. many are angry with president morsi's attempts to get additional powers. and planning to finish his current term, ehud barak will not seek re-election in january. back to "hardball." welcome back to "hardball." anti-tax crusader grover
4:35 pm
norquist has been called the most powerful man in washington, but is his influence on the wane? >> i'm not obligated on the pledge. made tennesseans aware, i was just elected, the only thing i'm honoring is the oath i take when i'm sworn in this january. >> when you're $16 trillion in debt, the only pledge we should be making to each other is to avoid becoming greece, and republicans should put revenue on the table. i will violate the pledge, long story short, for the good of the country, only if democrats will do entitlement reform. >> a pledge you signed 20 years ago, 18 years ago is for that congress. for instance, if i were in congress in 1941, i would have signed the -- supported a declaration of war against japan. i'm not going to attack japan today.
4:36 pm
the world has changed. >> that's a hell of a comparison. this morning norquist responded. let's listen. >> they all said that two years ago when we were arguing over the debt ceiling limits. so their position hasn't changed, and during the debt ceiling limit we cut spending, we didn't raise taxes. so other republicans did not listen to peter king or these others. >> and this guy is a political loan shark. the majority of americans want to see tax rates go up on the rich, but will norquist convince enough republicans it's better to dig in their heels than to reach a compromise? tom coburn is the republican senator from oklahoma, and joe klein is a columnist for "time." senator, i don't want to abuse your presence. my children think you're the greatest. i have a couple kids, one who worked on the debt commission and another one who just loves you for some reason. let's find out why. it seems to me if you look at the numbers, just arithmetic here, right now the government is taking in 15.7% of the gdp in the current fiscal year and
4:37 pm
spending 22.9% of the gdp. common sense tells us if we're going to get to 20, it seems like getting maybe to 20, maybe some liberals want to bid more, conservatives want to bid less. you have to come in both directions. your thoughts? >> i agree. the problem, chris, is we haven't had long-term thinkers in congress for a long time, and if you really look at it, the last 30 years we've lived off the next 30. i think the question is any combination that gets us out of the problem and onto a road of recovery in our economy and recovery of the future for our kids is a good combination. but the point has to be, there's no question we can have the rich pay more, but that won't solve our problem, and with that comes negatives. the real problem is you got an entitlement system that's out of whack, and the demographics are exaggerating that, and you've
4:38 pm
had discretionary spending increases. you know, the budget of this country this year is twice what it was 11 years ago, and a good portion of that is discretionary. some of it, $100 billion a year is the war, but the rest of the government has grown. so we have to do both. and we have to make sure that whatever we do does not hurt us but gets us on the way to recovery. >> let me get to joe klein on the politics of this. my contention is unless the liberal caucus led by nancy pelosi, a huge majority of democrats who are hard core liberals, unless they see teeth marks in the neck of eric cantor and boehner, unless they see the president has really gone in there and raised taxes on the rich, done something significant, maybe not the 39.6% but something that clearly bothers those people, she's not giving anything from her end. you've got to be tough on the tax front if you're going to get any action really along entitlement people. that's my view. >> i think that that's true, although i think what you're going to have here is a centrist coalition where the republicans
4:39 pm
in the house are going to drop their tea party supporters, and the democrats may have to drop some of their more extreme -- you know -- >> does this get you 218? does that get you 218? >> of course. boehner could have gotten there if he'd been willing to drop the tea party two years ago. i think that you'll see a small uptick in marginal rates, but you're going to satisfy haggling. this is the return of politics, and by the way, you have been saying there's only one house republican who is for this. you know, pete king just said it, but scott rigell from virginia took a courageous stand last year and defied grover norquist, and there are others. cantor is wavering now, and i think the writing is on the wall. >> is this going to have to come through the leadership, this deal on revenues to basically challenge norquist and the rigidity, senator, or can it be done around the edges where you have 100 votes from both sides
4:40 pm
of the aisle and 50 votes from a combination of the democrats and republicans in the senate? does it have to go through mcconnell, cantor, boehner, et cetera? >> there has to be a compromise. i disagree with you on rates because i think rates ultimately hurt us. reforming the tax code where the wealthy actually pay more would actually help us collect revenues and also stimulate the economy, and we shouldn't lose sight of that because we did that under reagan with tip o'neill and several others. we actually accomplished some great things for our country where we had economic growth in excess of 4.8% for over four years. so we shouldn't lose sight of the fact -- i don't care which way it comes. but i think the important thing is to protect all the things that are true. it is true we have a demographic problem and an entitlement problem. it is true some of the very wealthy are well-protected in terms of the tax code. we need to eliminate that. it is true there's going to come
4:41 pm
a point in time where we can't borrow any more money, and interest rates are going to skyrocket. so we need to merge all three of those, we need to leave our hats in terms of our partisanship outside and come in and solve the problems for the country. >> i agree with you on the arithmetic. joe, that is the problem. we're talking demographics here, not democrat versus republican but younger versus older. we are going to have so many older people depending on these programs. that's going to be tough for the young people to pay enough in payroll taxes to meet the needs of people in their 70s and 80s. >> obama care is going to be the law of the land. if we have universal health insurance, if anybody is covered, you can raise the retirement age for medicare. then you can have a system where you can go up to 70 years old. if the republicans cooperate and
4:42 pm
really force a system of health care exchanges, these health care superstores where you have real competition and you can drive down the premiums that are charged to individuals and small businesses. i mean, we have a real opportunity here. this is a great moment and, you know, i congratulate the senator for the pioneering work that he's done on this issue in the past. >> you know, we have to go but, senator, i want to congratulate you for voting for simpson/bowles. you and people like dick durbin, i have tremendous respect for you to stick your neck out and say something a lot of politicians won't do. it isn't perfect, but it's where we have to go. thank you so much for coming on. senator tom coburn, who, again, my kids seem to love for some reason. thank you very much for coming on, and joe klein of "time" magazine. up next, can president obama turn his voters into fighters? this will be fascinating. i found out how great the ground game was in florida.
4:43 pm
can he put this ground game to work to fight the fiscal cliff? the "hardball" story on that one is coming up right now, the place for politics.
4:44 pm
"the new york times" has just listed "jack kennedy: elusive hero," my book, on the best-seller list. it's a big honor for the paperback edition. it's a great book of american heroism, the story of jack kennedy, who he was when he lived, who led us, and, of course, who inspired us. it's a perfect upbeat gift for yourself or someone who shares our love of history and american greatness. we'll be right back.
4:45 pm
4:46 pm
those little things still get you. for you, life's about her. but your erectile dysfunction - that could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision,
4:47 pm
or if you have any allergic reactions such as rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial. well, we're back. republicans have always mocked the president's experience as a community organizer. remember those laugh lines back in 2008 at the convention? here they are again. >> he worked as a community organizer. what? >> i guess a small town mayor is sort of like a community organizer except that you have actual responsibilities. >> as you see, the president's experience as a community organizer when he got out of law school helped him build one of the most impressive ground
4:48 pm
teams. the president's team wants to use that energy in the current fiscal cliff debate. quote, mr. obama's aides are trying to harness the passions that returned him to the white house hoping to pressure republicans in congress to accept tax increases on the wealthy. joy reid is managing editor of she's at least as smart as i am, which is not an accolade, it's a fact, and she's much younger. okay. we found out this weekend, and you know this better than i, i enjoy your report on this, the obama campaign wasn't some kumbaya number. it was an incredibly organized machine. it was real, it was people meeting people, getting points for how many contacts you made with voters. they knew a certain number of contacts led to a probability of people voting. incredibly hands-on, real people
4:49 pm
with other people. can you turn that machine into something that can get the right kind of deal? >> i think the president spent a year and a half developing a gigantic infrastructure that and he did that -- >> human. >> through these kinds of direct contacts, but he also had an argument in the campaign that brought those people out. and central to that argument was that we need an economy that works for everyone, that people need to pay their fair share. >> so the key element of that, joy, is that there be tax fairness and the people at the top, who now get a tax break of 5% should not get that anymore because they don't need it. >> right. absolutely. even going back to what neera was talking about, if you lived in florida or ohio, the key states in 2008 and 2012, they never left. they were imbedded. the trick is going to be if the
4:50 pm
president and his team can solve this conundrum for democrats where they come out strong in presidential years and then fades away which leaves the opening for midterm elections -- >> you don't like that either, do you? >> it's a big bug-a-boo seeing minority voters go away. >> let's put the shoe where it belongs here, on the president's foot. leaders have to lead. >> right. >> he did get everybody to go vote. he gave enough good speeches but if anybody says his policies are what people got him to vote is where i'm at. secondly, the vicious personal attacks of his opponents, that helped a lot, too. people said, i'm not going to be screwed out of my vote. but what should he he do, joy -- you're not supposed to be coaching the guy but what should he do in the next days and weeks to arm and weaponize, basically, the public support that he has in the grassroots? >> i think the term bully pulpit
4:51 pm
is overused. the first time he was all about getting the policies done but he didn't seem to like to do the policy. he's got the infrastructure to keep the neighbor to neighbor going in swing states, places like virginia. >> neera, you're part of that world, the activist world. do you think he will do this or do you think he will sit with boehner and watch in the back room? >> i expect over the next several weeks, unless we have a deal imminently, which i don't think we have, the president will get out there. >> i always interrupt. you know what is missing, health care. if he had gotten the people out on the streets, bring the auto workers, get everybody down here and never had a big rally. >> and i think he learned from
4:52 pm
that and the payroll tax debate and they've learned and we've all learned that you have to get the american people on your side, that people on this issue agree with him. you know, you have people here speaking about rate tax cuts and the american people agree whole heartedly with the president on this issue and their feeling is it's time for the wealthy to pay their fair share and we can have a deal. this was central to the general election. >> let's look at the poll screens where we put numbers up. look at what the exit polls show. 47% were clear, they said they wanted to raise the tax rate on the wealthiest americans. it's just about half. another 13% says raise it on everybody. only 35% said they don't want tax at all. your thoughts, joy, it's not a majority but it's there. the fact is, the democrats -- i think you're dead right. i think if there was -- this person back in the white house rather than the other person was this issue of tax equity.
4:53 pm
>> it was an issue of tax equity. it was very important to his base that he get the rates up. he's got to go to virginia where eric cantor has to face re-election in two years. >> he's wobbling. >> and you've got to keep the pressure on. because the cross-pressure on people like cantor and boehner. he's going to have to keep the pressure on them. >> there's a bunch of them out there, have a little rally. >> florida. he should be going to florida, ohio. these are states where republicans said they were going to win and they lost and the president has a strong argument to make right now which is, just fresh off his victory, this is what he didn't have in his first term. the fiscal cliff allows him to make an argument -- >> ladies, 47% of the country voted for country. only 1% gets the benefit of all of these tax cuts. >> i know. >> that's 46% that can steal from the other side. >> thank you.
4:54 pm
happy holidays. you're coming around this time of year. it's a nice time of year. when we return, the republican assumption that they have a right to rule. that's why they are still stunned. you're watching "hardball," the place for politics. [ male announcer ] this is bob, a regular guy with an irregular heartbeat. the usual, bob? not today. [ male announcer ] bob has afib: atrial fibrillation not caused by a heart valve problem, a condition that puts him at greater risk for a stroke. [ gps ] turn left. i don't think so. [ male announcer ] for years, bob took warfarin, and made a monthly trip to the clinic to get his blood tested. but not anymore. bob's doctor recommended a different option: once-a-day xarelto®. xarelto® is the first and only once-a-day prescription blood thinner for patients with afib
4:55 pm
not caused by a heart valve problem, that doesn't require routine blood monitoring. like warfarin, xarelto® is proven effective to reduce the risk of an afib-related stroke. there is limited data on how these drugs compare when warfarin is well managed. no routine blood monitoring means bob can spend his extra time however he likes. new zealand! xarelto® is just one pill a day, taken with the evening meal. and with no dietary restrictions, bob can eat the healthy foods he likes. do not stop taking xarelto® rivaroxaban without talking to the doctor who prescribes it for you. stopping may increase your risk of having a stroke. get medical help right away if you develop any signs or symptoms of bleeding, like unusual bruising or tingling. you may have a higher risk of bleeding if you take xarelto® with aspirin products, nsaids or blood thinners. talk to your doctor before taking xarelto® if you currently have abnormal bleeding. xarelto® can cause bleeding, which can be serious, and rarely may lead to death. you are likely to bruise more easily on xarelto®,
4:56 pm
and it may take longer for bleeding to stop. tell your doctors you are taking xarelto® before any planned medical or dental procedures. before starting xarelto®, tell your doctor about any conditions, such as kidney, liver or bleeding problems. ready to change your routine? ask your doctor about once-a-day xarelto®. for more information including cost support options, call 1-888-xarelto or visit part of a whole new line of tablets from dell. it's changing the conversation. ♪
4:57 pm
let me finish tonight where i started. what does it mean when a group of people believe they have a right to rule? i'm talking about a ruling class. back at our founding, all men
4:58 pm
created equal had a couple of caveats, it meant men, not women, white men of property, not the workers depended on workers hiring them, not the 47% in that day. we're here in the 21st century with a group of americans that still rally to the thinking of the founding fathers. the caveats, the exceptions to the equality, the very limited notion of who is to be included in the ruling of the country, white men of property. i don't know how many people say this or openly think about it this way anymore, but why do, why did the romney folks feel that this is their country to rule? there must be some unknown aspect that renders it meaningless to them. you must think about this. because this is the reason why we saw what we saw in the months of the election, the effort to support the minority vote, the giant billboards warning them of felony arrests and why the white
4:59 pm
working class through an endless on onslaught against the working. that's it for now. thanks for being with us. "the ed show" starts right now. good evening, americans. welcome to "the ed show" from new york. new comments on the fiscal cliff have liberals deeply concerned tonight. this is "the ed show." let's get to work. >> this is going to get hairy. >> democrats hold all the cards in fiscal cliff negotiations, but you wouldn't know it from these remarks from senior adviser david plouffe. >> revenue and how much and where does it come from. democrats are going to have to step up and do some tough things. >> congressman peter delaware faz owe is here to respond. >> ceos begin their campaign to roll back theoc

Hardball With Chris Matthews
MSNBC November 26, 2012 4:00pm-5:00pm PST

News/Business. (2012) (CC)

TOPIC FREQUENCY Us 6, Florida 5, Romney 5, Boehner 5, John Mccain 5, Virginia 4, Grover Norquist 4, Norquist 3, Joe Klein 3, Obama 3, Bob 3, Warfarin 3, Garth 2, New York 2, Joan Walsh 2, Texas 2, Oklahoma 2, Cialis 2, Barack Obama 2, Barnes & Noble 2
Network MSNBC
Duration 01:00:00
Scanned in Richmond, CA, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Virtual Ch. 787 (MSNBC HD)
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 1920
Pixel height 1080
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color

disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only
Uploaded by
TV Archive
on 11/27/2012